Talk:Shiv (3.5e Equipment)

Balance

So basically, by level 20, you can effectively ignore 5 points of AC, effectively giving you the same benefit as a +5 bonus to attack rolls? I think there's a serious balance problem here... --Ghostwheel 22:11, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. I think I meant something more like ignoring damage reduction, which keeps the premise of penetration while keeping a more acceptable measure of balance. - TG Cid 22:14, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

To be fair, though, considering the shiv's damage output is lower than most weapons (given the circumstantiality of sneak attack damage, 1 base damage for a Medium-size weapon and its status as a light weapon) I think it might be more reasonable than usual to make it easier to hit with. It's not as if it's supposed to be wielded by someone with maximum BAB and Power Attack; the user would most likely be a rogue or assassin with emphasis on sneak attack. - TG Cid 23:12, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

To be fair, only rogues and other characters who have an additional source of damage are going to use light weapons that can be TWF'ed, and to be fair, base weapon damage doesn't really matter much past level 3-4, while to-hit can make a BIG difference on average DPR throughout all levels. --Ghostwheel 23:17, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

What if you can't make a masterwork shiv (thus preventing a shiv from gaining enchantments) and then allowed the shiv to penetrate both armor bonuses and DR? The reason for this would be to maintain the shiv's flavor whil putting it on even ground (or perhaps even below) more conventional weapons. Plus, who has ever heard of a masterwork shiv? - TG Cid 23:50, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

That could work, but be sure to say so explicitly, along with the fact that they can't be enchanted under any circumstances, even by things like the Greater Magic Weapon spell to keep balance. --Ghostwheel 00:26, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Done. - TG Cid 00:38, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

AoOs

"Due to the necessity of extremely close proximity when using a shiv, it can be used to deliver melee touch attacks without provoking an attack of opportunity"

That... doesn't normally happen anyway. What is this? -- Eiji-kun (talk) 08:23, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

I have absolutely no idea. I removed the offending clause so it can still be used to make touch attacks, just without the weirdness. - TG Cid (talk) 19:00, 7 October 2014 (UTC)